marc goldstein wrote:

one person here has mastered his photographic knowlege and equipment very well. Bravo!
and also the Nikkor 17-35mm is at its sharpest and most contrated at F13.

wow...sounds like pig-latin to me!

Kelly Watkins wrote:

ah! well maybe i could teach you about flowers and wine in exchange for some lighting techniques!!

you know i'm just messing with you. i have a huge amount of respect for your work and talent. best wishes with the cube series...

you two need to get a room

Film or Digital Photo wrote:
marc I seen your work for months and with so many model I don’t now how you do it to get models to do the things you do but keep up the good work. Just wish some day we can all get as good as you. I now if you ever wanted to teach a class in this will be the first in line. But will change it my own way. I’m always looking for new ways to get some great images from models. But what you do is just amazing and in the past send you a few models but I see never work out. Keep up the good work and if you love to give me some good pointers willing to hear from you. Like where the lights are or how much you pay your models.

marc doesn't pay his models.... but he does feed us well durring the shoot!

glide on fade photo wrote:
you can easily replicate most of the ideas in several of those shots with a basic understanding of three point lighting, three heads, a softbox and a working understanding of adjusting ratios.  Anyone paying half attention in a cinematography course should be able to do setups similar to this after auditing a course.  The first thing you'll learn after seeing many different gaffers work is that there are a million ways to skin a cat, you'll see a lot of techniques that land you near the same place.  First things first, these photos are hardly dark when you have an 11 or 16 stop, why you would want that kind of depth for photos like this is a mystery to me...  Just because you have a definitive black in a photo suggesting dark does not necessarily make it dark...  Second, there is a lot of slop in some of them which really doesnt inspire the idea that a lot of grip was employed to pull these off.  Look at the spill on the floor on this one that really flattens the whole thing out-
http://www.pbase.com/dudedelux/image/64623281
an edge light on the chair would have been much more effective.

Anyhow, just because something looks nice (which these do) doesnt mean its complicated (which these arent).  Throw a softbox above your model and use whatever modifier you want to soften your fill and you are enough of the percentage of the way there where the rest is minutia, others will call that last bit style.

If you take those pictures of trisha in the above link, you can get close enough by lighting the set from above with a soft box or whatever large diffuse surface you want to use, blasting your model off from the right with a less diffuse source for the pop and then throwing that color from the left from a more diffuse source.  This is basic, basic, basic stuff.  What makes it look nice is the ratio between the heads and the modifiers on each sources and thats the fun stuff everyone should be figuring out for themselves, developing a style of their own...

please, everyone do everyone a favor and listen to this person....I'll bet you ten shillings they know what they're talking about.

Film or Digital Photo wrote:
marc I seen your work for months and with so many model I don’t now how you do it to get models to do the things you do but keep up the good work. Just wish some day we can all get as good as you. I now if you ever wanted to teach a class in this will be the first in line. But will change it my own way. I’m always looking for new ways to get some great images from models. But what you do is just amazing and in the past send you a few models but I see never work out. Keep up the good work and if you love to give me some good pointers willing to hear from you. Like where the lights are or how much you pay your models.

You just hit the nail on the head ! 
The hardest part in taking a photo is getting the model to show up !!!
lol

(many thanks for your kind words)

Soda Rae wrote:
please, everyone do everyone a favor and listen to this person....I'll bet you ten shillings they know what they're talking about.

Actually, no. But it was a fun guessing game.
Now pay up the ten shillings.

marc goldstein wrote:

Actually, no. But it was a fun guessing game.

indeed, I believe you and I just now looked at your portfolio and it is great.  But I was skeptical because I've seen a photographer very accurately recreate that same lighting, and a.) it's mostly simple soft boxes and strobes, and b.) the originals look like complete sh*t.

So I thought maybe you had done the same.  Good to hear you don't. : )

Soda Rae wrote:

indeed, I believe you and I just now looked at your portfolio and it is great.  But I was skeptical because I've seen a photographer very accurately recreate that same lighting, and a.) it's mostly simple soft boxes and strobes, and b.) the originals look like complete sh*t.

So I thought maybe you had done the same.  Good to hear you don't. : )

marc's originals dont look shitty....i've seen 'em

Arizona Lightscapes wrote:
Yeah, yeah, that's it, let's make him do a workshop !  Can't some of you California models convince him to share the knowledge.  I'm driving over from Phoenix NOW !

I don't think half of MM would fit in marc's studio

Lory wrote:

marc doesn't pay his models.... but he does feed us well durring the shoot!

That I can do unless you mean in some other way???

he is what I call 1 of the top best in what he does when it comes to nudes a new kind of nude ( I now you don't call it that ) but to get all the models he has and been able to talk then to get this kind of job done without no money in return if someone I will love to lean from.

Film or Digital Photo wrote:

That I can do unless you mean in some other way???

he is what I call 1 of the top best in what he does when it comes to nudes a new kind of nude ( I now you don't call it that ) but to get all the models he has and been able to talk then to get this kind of job done without no money in return if someone I will love to lean from.

its called glamour nudes... i think

he had sushi for me, and even thought to buy stuff in case i was a vegetarian...thats what i ment

and i got 50 amazing images from marc, plus a slot in his gallery.... so when you can promise that, you should be on the right path

Soda Rae wrote:

indeed, I believe you and I just now looked at your portfolio and it is great.  But I was skeptical because I've seen a photographer very accurately recreate that same lighting, and a.) it's mostly simple soft boxes and strobes, and b.) the originals look like complete sh*t.

So I thought maybe you had done the same.  Good to hear you don't. : )

I'm confused. Done the same what?

Since the discussion is about the lighting used in the Red Chair, I have created a modular system made of 7 strobes, 3 beauty dishes(w/grid), 1 molla dish, 1 softbox(used on the fill light) and 1 magnum reflector (w/grid) connected to a D4 powerpack that allows me to modify each head depending on the angle I shoot from.
The key was to create a system were I would never have to m ove a single light while the model is finding her flow. The key light is on a huge boom and can be moved anywhere with a finger.

So while this photog from NY was explaining IN EXTENSIA to everyone how it's done (???)
-I guess he must have my studio under surveillance-
The OP was on the phone with me taking notes on how I ACTUALLY do it.

This said, I have no claim to have invented anything. I'm just doing my thing.
The models love their photos and around 40.000 peeps look at the gallery every day.

Tenley Nordstrom wrote:
i dont understand how this is fantastic lighting?? i mean i'm not a photographer but i'm trying to learn things and it looks like more post-photoshop type stuff...and one light? i dont understand the fuss i guess

90% in camera. 7 strobes Tenley, not one.
PS only takes care of cellulite.

Tenley Nordstrom wrote:
i dont understand how this is fantastic lighting?? i mean i'm not a photographer but i'm trying to learn things and it looks like more post-photoshop type stuff...and one light? i dont understand the fuss i guess

you are making yourself sound like a stereotypical model

go look at the images... and read what people have been saying...

one light? give me a break

Christopher Ambler wrote:
I'll chime in with my three points:

1. I love the red chair series. That's just my personal preference. Art is subjective.

2. I think I have a decent idea how he lights it, but I don't much care if I'm right or wrong. See point #1.

3. I look forward to the cube series, but then I'd look forward to whatever Marc does next. Doesn't mean I'll like it (or dislike it), but one solid hit with me means I look forward to the next.

4. I just find it personally pleasing that, at least right now, Lory's avatar is a frame that I shot. Speaking of egos, it does mine good that my crappy work pleases her :-)

5. I can't count.

awww... me luvs you!

everyone has thier groove... marc does it with lights, you do it in the middle of a run down mill at dusk

you both have talent! and I'm lucky to have worked with both of you
(even tho my picture isn't in either of your ports :cough cough:)

Lory wrote:
(even tho my picture isn't in either of your ports :cough cough:)

Um ... I may not be able to count, but I'm pretty sure that's you in position #2, dear.

Christopher Ambler wrote:

Um ... I may not be able to count, but I'm pretty sure that's you in position #2, dear.

yay!!!!!!!

happy now

marc goldstein wrote:
One thing hasn't been said AT ALL here.
The Red Chair isn't about the lighting at all.
THE SUBJECT is the MODEL, NOT the LIGHTING.
And if beautiful women like Lory weren't in it, I don't think anybody would spend much time looking at a piece of furniture.

This said, Christopher, you're women are beautiful and so pleasing to the eye,
No matter how you choose to light them.

you need to get some of your other girls in here marc... you're starting to make me blush

Lory wrote:

you need to get some of your other girls in here marc... you're starting to make me blush

But then you'd hear: "he forced me drink too much Tequilla and made me do things I came to regret later."

marc goldstein wrote:
One thing hasn't been said AT ALL here.
The Red Chair isn't about the lighting at all.
THE SUBJECT is the MODEL, NOT the LIGHTING.
And if beautiful women like Lory weren't in it, I don't think anybody would spend much time looking at a piece of furniture.

I couldn't agree more, hence my point number two

marc goldstein wrote:
This said, Christopher, you're women are beautiful and so pleasing to the eye,
No matter how you choose to light them.

Simply. And at the mill, 90% with what's available at the time. It's such a large location that I go with the intention of using whichever parts seem appealing based on the weather and light at the moment. Zero skill on my part - I use what works and avoid what doesn't.

PradoFoto wrote:
Just saw this thread. Marc, you know i've always been a huge fan, ever since you started that photog's group on Myspace! love the red chair series! you're a master of light, my friend!!! I really don't want to know how he does it. part of the beautiful mystique for me is not knowing! and part of the fun is trying to guess how he does! but if i really wanted to know... i would study his images, and just try over and over to recreate it and hopefully in the process of doing so, would find my own style of lighting, similiar, but not the same. however, i truely appreciate the art value of his work and have no intension on trying to recreate these amazing images on my own! i'd only screw it up! lol seriously though, great work Marc!!!

And I love you too brother.

marc goldstein wrote:

But then you'd hear: "he forced me drink too much Tequilla and made me do things I came to regret later."

bullshit.. its not like you're pouring it down thier throats....

i hate it when models say shit like that

Christopher Ambler wrote:
I use what works and avoid what doesn't.

That's a skill. 

Lory wrote:
ok.. the hijack will end here, but how come you have the mill add in your port twice... i mean you have a 100 slots but geezz why use em like that?

One was on the dead server, so I added it back until the dead server starts serving images again. Looks like it did today, so I deleted the extra one.

Yeah, no hijacking! Let's get back to talking about Marc's hot models who are in this thread

Lory wrote:

bullshit.. its not like you're pouring it down thier throats....

i hate it when models say shit like that

Would you expect them to say: "Mom, dad, I really didn't mean to shame you, but I really needed to express my inner Penthouse Pet."

marc goldstein wrote:

90% in camera. 7 strobes Tenley, not one.
PS only takes care of cellulite.

I am glad you are participating here Marc.

I'll read it in the morning and I am certain I'll find some good tips! 

marc goldstein wrote:

Would you expect them to say: "Mom, dad, I really didn't mean to shame you, but I really needed to express my inner Penthouse Pet."

If you need to be drunk to do it maybe you shouldn't try...

me? I just need verbal encouragement...tell me I'm purty... it always helps!

Lory wrote:

If you need to be drunk to do it maybe you shouldn't try...

me? I just need verbal encouragement...tell me I'm purty... it always helps!

Didn't I just tell you to stick your •ss out more ?  lol

Udor wrote:

I am glad you are participating here Marc.

I'll read it in the morning and I am certain I'll find some good tips! 

Unlikely, but if it's tip you need, I'll gladly trade you for additional photo slots in my port.